Textual Meaning

Chantell talked about interpreting texts, and it has reminded me of some interesting conversations I’ve had with my classes, as well as my observations on how we assign meaning to a text.

One Fish, Two Fish…
Every semester I ask my students if there is one central interpretation of a text or if there are multiple readings. I always get a lot of different answers. Perhaps students haven’t thought about it before. Many think there is one main message to “get,” and then others think you can get a lot of different things from a text. At this point we talk about theme and how a work can have one theme or multiple themes. We also begin discussing how you can analyze the text and make interpretations about the position the text takes on the theme.

Who’s the Boss?
I also ask students if they think the author had an intended meaning behind the text. Since I teach that you begin writing with consideration of your purpose and audience, we usually agree that the author has an intended meaning. (Check Marjorie’s recent blog.) Then I ask the fun question. If our interpretation doesn’t happen to match the author’s intended meaning, does that make our interpretation less valid? I ask these questions so that students will realize that usually texts do have a main theme and a generally agreed-upon interpretation. However, you can read a text through many different critical lenses and have valid interpretations.

New Vision
Interacting with my students helped me realize that each student’s personal connection with a text is extremely important. Traditionally literature instructors taught that students needed to catch the agreed-upon critical interpretation of text. In making classes a dissection of texts with critical theory, they minimized the student’s experience and devalued personal interpretations. After being a student in that environment but then standing behind the lectern myself, I believe the best way to facilitate learning literature is to empower students with critical theory but to also validate their personal interpretations. We can’t expect people to desire to read if we don’t let allow them the freedom to assign meaning themselves.

9 Books

I'm a sucker for memes, especially if they're about books.No one tagged me for this, but I wanted to answer it anyway.

1) One book that changed your life: Boundaries: When to Say Yes, When to say No, To Take Control of Your Life by Dr. Henry Cloud & Dr. John Townsend

2) One book that you'd read more than once: Pride & Prejudice by Jane Austen (I have read this more than once)

3) One book you'd want on a deserted island: The Complete Works of William Shakespeare –it’s got everything, tragedy, mystery, romance, comedy—whatever you are in the mood for

4) One book that made you laugh: Confessions of a Shopaholic by Sophie Kinsella

5) One book that made you cry: Night by Elie Wiesel

6) One book you wish you'd written: To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

7) One book you wish had never been written: The DaVinci Code by Dan Brown. He shouldn’t have made so much money on such a ridiculous book.

8) One book you're currently reading: Killing Floor by Lee Child. An exciting mystery that is solved (I’m guessing) by the suspect in the case.

9) One book you've been meaning to read: 12 “Christian” Beliefs That Can Drive You Crazy: Relief from False Assumptions by Cloud and Townsend

You can put your own answers in the comments or link to your blog, if you want to!

Great Books and Guilt

I’m out of town visiting family and therefore I have more time to spend on the Internet. I found myself checking out “Great Books” sites, starting with Time magazine’s Top 100 Novels, the Great Books site at anova.org, and my favorite title for a list: “1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die.” Don’t you just love the parental tone: “You must read these books, or no intellectual enrichment for you, young lady!”

Looking over the lists of canonized Great Works of Literature, I felt an emotion I’ve rarely experienced but that I think most of us who aspire to be readers and/or writers encounter at some point. I’m talking about Book Guilt.

Book Guilt is the feeling that you aren’t reading the right books. That you’re ignorant. That there are gaps in your knowledge.

Well, of course there are gaps in your knowledge! No one, especially in an Information Age, can be a generalist, much less know everything. But if a book is important in your field, shouldn’t you [translation: I] have read it? What were my professors thinking, leaving That Book off the syllabus? Sure, I’d read a lot of the biggies, both under duress and of my own free will, but how did I miss The Scarlet Letter, for crying out loud? Or any of Dostoyevsky, or Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness? I need to get right on those, along with a big chunk of Dickens (I think the only book of his I’ve read with any thoroughness is A Christmas Carol).

So what have I been doing since I left graduate school, I asked myself? (Guilt.) Yes, I’ve read good books written in the 20th and 21st century—which I prefer, because let’s face it’s just easier to read something when it’s written in modern English, and when you don’t have to consult footnotes just to understand what’s going on. A lot of the classics require quite a commitment, both of time (they’re often long books!) and mental energy. Which is exactly why they’re worth reading. But sometimes it’s just easier to open up the latest mystery or chick lit novel.

Not that I’m knocking mysteries or other “fun” books. We all need our escapes, and if your worst vice is reading bestsellers, then I think you’re doing pretty well. In fact, I think genre books can contain some excellent writing when the authors have taken their craft seriously. And remember: today’s “fun” book could be tomorrow’s classic. At one time, Jane Austen’s novels were merely frivolous entertainment for ladies, while Dickens was a popular author enjoyed by the masses. Still, if we want to know what makes a book last, what it means to write well, we need to look to the books that have endured for centuries. As an added bonus, the books from past eras often have a moral, even spiritual, message that is lacking from more recent works.

I think I’ll start with The Scarlet Letter. I may not have read it, but I do know it has a theme of sin and redemption. Sounds like it might be worth checking out.

Inspiration, Anointing or Hard Work?

“Don’t wait for inspiration because inspiration takes long vacations.”
-A writing quote I read long, long ago

It’s interesting to me that Christian musicians worry about “the anointing,” while writers are apprehensive about getting an “inspiration.” (I can’t help but wonder if there’s a similarity here between preaching (under the anointing) and (inspired) teaching.) They’re two different callings requiring a distinctive mastery of specific talents. What they both require for continuous success is a mastery of craft.

Between practice (which is often imitation) and inspiration (which can be unadulterated creativity), there is craft, the perfecting of the tools within your trade so that inspiration flows more perfectly. Craft is an exponential magnitude of practice, for practice can be a deadening repetition, while craft is a dedicated sharpening of skills.

Ron touched on this when he discussed guitar tones, but I am unaware of this subject being a topic of discussion within our movement in any serious manner.

Genius Status
Some years ago I read an interview that said genius could be attained in a particular field when you devoted 10,000 hours (almost 5 years worth of 40 hour weeks) toward it. That would be 10,000 hours of craft.

Frankly, after editing articles for this zine for almost eight years, the easiest way I can spot a rank amateur is in their insistence that no word in their piece be changed; often they imply every word was inspired by God. That’s someone who has writing talent but never writes. (Similar to ice skating, it is only the beginners who count how many times they fall; the regulars are too busy focusing on skills improvement, even if it’s as simple as skating faster and stopping quicker.)

We expect carpenters and bricklayers to apprentice, and doctors to spend a year in residency, but writers are just supposed to wait for heavenly inspiration? Ridiculous!

For us, craft is taking instruction from writing books, reading the classics and author interviews, finding a writing group (local or online), and enrolling in classes to better the work(s) in progress. It’s geeking out over the perfect use of an adverb. It’s learning, practicing, failing, and then mastering the boring little stuff to reach maximum effectiveness.

It’s writing at least 500 words/1 page every day of our life (although Stephen King recommends 1,500 words/ 3 pages). It’s sacrificing other activities, important activities, to write with no hint of a reward.

Craft, not inspiration, is the overlooked, underappreciated bridge to sustained excellence. And it’s the bridge none of us want to cross. Unless we’re willing to accept Christ’s calling in our lives.

Me? I’ve still got 1,368 hours to go.

Appendix A

Best Author Interview(s) of the Week:

Powell’s Bookstore in Portland is one of the best independent stores in the country. It’s web-site is superior to Amazon’s (though it’s discounts aren’t), because, among its many features are innumerable author interviews! I recommend you start with Michael Ondaatje’s, author of the Booker-winning The English Patient (if you’ve seen the movie you haven’t read the book), the incredible In the Skin of a Lion and the new, but much-less-satisfying Divisadero.

Currently Reading: Defeating the Spirit of Jezebel by John Arcovio. Spiritual warfare is an area I’m woefully weak in, and this book, while disorganized, is laden with invaluable nuggets.

Just Finished: Nebuchadnezzar: Scourge of Zion (7/31) by Mark Healy; The Atlantic Monthly’s Summer Fiction issue.

Fun Idea: Track the books you read each year by write down the title, date you finished and the author. (Tip of the hat: The seed of the idea came from Stephen Covey’s 7 Habits of Highly Effective People.) After 11 years of making an annual list, I can report that it makes for a fun, informal journal of your life.

And I thank you for your kind attention.

Freedom Writers

The Movie

I finally had the opportunity to watch the movie Freedom Writers starring Hilary Swank. (I'm always behind the loop on movies.) Anyway, the movie, based on a true story, deals with a young, idealistic teacher who wants to make a difference at an integrated, low-income school in the early 90s. She is assigned to teach freshman English. At first she has a really hard time--the kids' lives are consumed with racial tension, gang and domestic violence and drugs among many other things. But she doesn't start to connect with them until she starts a journaling project with them where they are able to write out their frustrations and experiences.

Me

I guess Freedom Writers touched me so deeply, first of all, because I am a teacher, going into my 3rd year of teaching, believe it or not, and I can identify with that spark, that idealism, that drive to want to make a difference that Hilary Swank's character had. It reawakened something in me because I have felt myself begin to lose that spark. It's so easy to get stuck in a routine, so easy to get jaded--and I don't even work at a tough school in the least bit. In fact, it's pretty upper crust. Perhaps the cushiness of my position has allowed me to get too comfortable.

Secondly, I was moved because it displayed the power of writing. What is it about pouring our hearts out on paper that is so transforming? For some reason, there's a different form of catharsis that happens with the written word than with the spoken word. Yes, I've experienced the burden that is lifted when you finally have the courage to talk about it. But something inexplicable, maybe even more profound in some ways, happens when you write about it.

Journaling

Last time I talked about blogging, which is a journaling of sorts, but bloggers always have their readers in mind. And for me, at least, there is a screen. There are always a few things that are filtered because no matter how authentic I may want to portray myself and my life, in the back of my mind I know that I am literally exposing myself to the world.

But I also have a personal journal. I've kept one consistently since I was twelve (back when I used to call it a 'diary'). There are no barriers because the only audience is myself and God. It's weird to look at something written by your own hand years ago and to think, "I can't believe I thought that!" Part of the wonder of it is that I can look back at things and see how I have evolved, changed and matured.

The Word

To me the Psalms seem like a Biblical version of journaling. David very honestly pours out his joys and frustrations. Perhaps he had time to read over them years later and to reflect and to realize that no matter how he felt at the time or what kind of hand life dealt him, God heard him.

(Still) currently reading (at a snail's pace): Never Eat Alone by Kevin Ferrazzi

Poetry ... for the heck of it

Journal entry: 12-7-02

Papaw's Telephone

There is an old phone I got from my grandfather’s barn
It doesn’t work, but it is a memory of him.
I’d like to pick it up and hear the conversations that once filtered through it,
Talk of kids, and cars, and unmentionables.

He died four years ago of Parkinson’s Disease, in Springhill.
I was there, he recognized me with wide eyes.
For years he could not talk, but only write
His voice gone, but not his mind.

After years in the nursing home, the medication, the age, the mind slipped.
And he revealed to us secrets of his life.
He was afraid of the windows, They’ll shoot me! he wrote
It was his fears of the War, his inability to move.

He always remembered me, the only Stevens male left.
With wide eyes and big hands, he’d squeeze mine
And write to me a few scribbled questions,
What kind of man had I grown to become?

And then one day, He wrote a phone number down
And scrawled, She’ll take care of me.
My grandmother called it, and found out another secret
That had been swept under the rug of time.

He died a disgrace, everyone knowing his secrets.
A man of honesty and integrity, but died with little.
I preached my first funeral, and they all said I was good;
A man of honesty and integrity.

But, I kept the phone I found in his barn, as a reminder
Of its secret, whispered conversations.
What was once hidden, became known unto all, and I will not forget
To act with honesty and integrity, in secret too.

~Toby Stevens

www.thejourneyanchorage.org

I'm currently reading:

The Secret Message of Jesus: Uncovering the Truth that Could Change Everything, by Brian McLaren

Chasing Daylight, by Erwin McManus

How important is an author to the text?

I think we're posting this week, and if I wait to add a picture it will be afternoon! So if you really want to see...click

There are at least two ways of reading:
On the one hand, the text stands on its own while on the other, you read the text to find out who the author is. This is as true for fiction as it is for philosophical tomes. There are some who read Huckleberry Finn and the character of Huck or Jim or whomever become as real people with their own inborn motivations and desires. There are others who can read the same work, but read it to see how much of Samuel Clemens (these people would never use the moniker of Mark Twain!) is in Huck and they work to discover Sam's inborn motivations and desires. Similarly, there are readers of Kant who take the categorical imperative or antinomies of reason and will happily discuss these concepts/ideas all day long. Then the other set picks up Critique of Pure Reason and begins to interpret who Immanuel is, the German raised in a dogmatic religious household struggling to balance his religious experience with reason and the Age of Enlightenment.

Pushing it further:
The first camp of readers could eschew Christian authors if the content of the text is dark or perhaps sexually explicit (J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series or Graham Greene's The End of the Affair). The second camp could likewise avoid books if the author of said book was too "dark" or "sexually explicit" in his/her personal life (Friedrich Nietzsche or David Sedaris).

What's a reader to do?
As with most questions with two answers, the correct response is not either/or; it's both/and. However, the difficulty of achieving the right kind of balance between these two approaches to reading is akin to what I know as The Aquinas Challenge where you put the Bible on one end of a yardstick and Aristotle on the other and try to run as far as you can without either book falling off. In short, balance is hard to achieve. You cannot pretend that book and author are totally distinct from one another, but you also must assert that each is capable of having a life of its own.

What's a writer to do?
This fact is probably the most frightening to a writer. When you have a work produced in your lifetime, people will decide that work is you...and not only you, but all of the people you hold dear. Suddenly your spouse, parents, siblings, children, and friends must stand ready for the onslaught of investigation and critique that will come their way as well as your own. At these times, you may really want to assert that the content should stand removed from its author, but it still can't. It is you and to some extent it is all those people who influence and shape you. Hopefully, all will be educated readers enough to find the balance between you the author and the book you've written, but there's no guarantee that will be done. If you're a writer, you write anyway.

Lastly, the big book
I close with how this discussion bears on a pet peeve of mine. There is a tendency in conservative Christian circles to read the Bible for content only and with almost no regard for distinctive writers. Nowhere is this more practiced than with the four gospels. It is true that three of those gospels (Mark, Matthew, and Luke) most probably were working from the same body of material and even borrowed from one another. However, this should be all the more reason to keep them distinctive (they knew the other's existed and yet still chose to put their edited version out there with new material). Each was working to produce something with a unique audience and purpose in mind. To borrow language from one and stuff it into the mouth of the other is wrong. Don't even get me started on what is know as the gospel of John! It is so distinctive in genre, content, chronology, etc. that it must stand alone. The only thing John has in common with the others is that they're about Jesus (and the feeding of the five thousand). Otherwise, it's almost entirely new and different material.

If I don't say it then someone might have a heart attack:
I believe all of the gospels to be true. I think God is the one ultimate author of all. I don't think these texts contradict each other in any way which would require me to say that one is true and the other false. I don't believe any of them is written with such a heavy handed agenda that there are exaggerations or rhetoric so that truth becomes obscured. I think that covers everything. I'm just asking that these writers be allowed the same artistic merit that we give to others. P.S. I didn't allow myself room to go into how Paul is maligned by not having his letters read holistically (they are to different audiences at different times in his life).

What I'm reading right now:
Don Quixote by Miguel Cervantes (I've set a deadline to be done by August 24)

A Tale of Three Kings by Gene Edwards (If you haven't read this--you should. It's a quick read and it is very insightful. I'm only taking so long because it's my book club reading and as such it's divided into chunks!)

The Book Thief by Markus Zusak

On the education of children by Michel de Montaigne (I love, love, love this old, crazy man!! So much so that about once a quarter I find myself compelled to pull down the book and read one of his essays.)